Skip to main content

WHY JAMES ARMINIUS WAS A SUCCESS?

One of the divisive subject among believers is human will and God sovereignty in salvation.  Believers argued among themselves and discussed the role of God and man in our salvation.  James Arminius (also called Jacobus) stands out in history who contributed to this discussion. Erasmus Desiderious, prior to Arminius, wrote a book in 1524 called The Freedom of the Will.  Martin Luther responded with a book called, “On the Bondage of the Will.”  When, analyzing Arminium theology, James Arminius gave the rise to human will theology.  

Arminius Life
James Arminius was born in 1560 at Outewater, a small town of Holland.  He grew up without the father.  Later Arminius mother, sister, and two brothers were sacked by Spanish troops. Aemilius Roman Catholic priest took oversight for the first fifteen fifteen years, than Rudolf Snellius (a wealthy Dutch linguist and mathematician) took the financial responsibility for his schooling later in Arminius life. In the year of 1575, he was admitted to the Leyden University, where he studied six years “the directors of the body of merchants.”  The government of Amsterdam took from Snellius and sent him to Geneva, where he was shaped by Theodore Beza (successor of John Calvin).  James Arminius was fully exposed to the teaching of Calvin and knew Beza Theodore personally. Beza offered Arminius to pursue doctor degree for no cost when tension arise with Aristotelian teachers, but he declined saying he was too young for that. Arminius was known for his brilliant mind during his studies.  In 1583 Arminius returned to continue theological studies for three more years, and in 1609 he became a “pastor in Amsterdam and later Professor of Divinity at Leiden.”  The question comes to mind how theology of human will influenced James Arminius.   

Arminian Beliefs 
The discussion on human will has been discussed among scholars. Erasmus, called the “prince of humanists” and Luther both addressed this topics in the books that they wrote.  However,  Arminius theology on human will was not evident till he was a pastor at Amsterdam.  Arminius was given a book written by Theodore Koornhert from his colleague Lydius at University of Franeker to give a response.  Koornhert attacks Beza teaching on the doctrine of predestination “where he showed himself [as] a second Erasmus in advocating a concept of human free will.” Koornhert, however, agreed with Beza on "that divine predestination was the antecedent, unconditional, and immutable decree of God concerning the salvation or damnation of each individual.” But they differ on the doctrine of man.  He “reacted particularly against the high Calvinism (double predestination) of Beza… which he judged to be unjust and unworthy of God.” After reading the Koornhert’s work,  Arminius struggled to connect with what he was thought.  In 1593, Arminius published lectures on Epistle to the Rome, questioning Calving’s and Beza’s.

People through history misquoted and misunderstood Arminius. There were points that Arminius agreed with Beza and Calvin.  There were unity on the fall of humankind.  Nick Needham writes: He accepted that the fall of humankind in Adam had indeed enslaved the will to sin. However, he argued that God’s grace had supernaturally restored a measure of liberty to the fallen will, enough to enable it to repent and believe if it so chose.  This universal gift of enabling or sufficient grace he termed ‘prevenient grace’… He did not, therefore, base human freedom on the inborn or natural independence of the will, nor on superficial views of human depravity, but on divine grace universally bestowed to remedy the will’s otherwise helpless bondage to sin.

When human will is discussed, most often human freedom is the topic. Arminius based his view of human freedom on divine universal grace, not in the person himself.  In other words, Arminius believed that humans, by their sinful nature, cannot react to God. Therefore, God gives universal grace to all, and from there, the sinner makes the decision to accept the salvation or not.
  
Arminius was skeptical that believers can fall away from grace. Yet, some passages in bible made him think this way. Gregg Alison writes: “Arminius himself was forthright as to his own belief: ‘I never taught that a true believer can either totally or finally fall away from the fight and perish; yet, I will not conceal that there are passages of Scripture which seem to me to bear this aspect.’”

As noted, Arminius supported the depravity of man, and that a true believer can not fall away from grace; as a result, he developed a third option, called prevenient grace–this has distanced himself from the rest of theologians.  He struggled to reconcile his previous education to the new theology of Koornhert.  

Arminian Influence
Arminius was effective in challenging Calvinist theology for numerous reasons. First, he had a brilliant mind and that lead him to be an influential professor of divinity at the University of Leyden.  His students, went down to local churches and preached the professors theology.  Second, Arminius had great relationship with his government.  Since the church and state were together in leadership, Johan van Oldenbarnevelt (states general), backed Arminius in his theology. That set the stage for magistrates to favor Arminius when ever there was a discussion on the doctrine of human will and God’s sovereignty.  Third, Arminius was a good pastor.  He showed good bed side manners with “greatest courage and kindness in visiting the sick.”  Lastly,  Arminius had powerful family ties. He married Elizabeth Reael, a daughter of Laurent Reael, a judge and senator of Amsterdam.  The whole scene gave James Arminius the platform to proclaim the theology of human will. However, at the age 49, he died of the tuberculosis sickness. 

Arminian Legacy
In 1610, 46 advocates met in the city of Gouda, “under the leadership of Hans Uytenbogaert (a pastor) and Simon Episcopus.  Feeling the pressure from the churches, they drafted a short remonstrance letter… against the Calvinists.  The Remonstrance [letter] was a defense meant to answer the charges of heresy against the pastors.”  If the church was unhappy with the Arminian pastor, they would pressure the government.  This drew political leaders into the discussion. 

The Remonstrance (which got their name after the writings of the letter) defended themselves in The Five Arminium Articles.  These articles were focused on predestination, atonement, depravity of man, free will, and man man’s autonomy.  Calvinist countered responded to the controversy with the The Canon of Dort in 1619.  Today, these are known as five points of Calvinism. 

Political pressure mounted and “A national Synod was called in response to deal with the acute problem raised.”  In 1618, states general of the Netherlands called 56 ministers and elders, 5 professors, with 18 political commissioners to report back to the states general.  Prince Maurice feeling pressure from Remonstrants and their influence of over the region, used political and military means to move against them. He arrested the leaders of Remonstrants and used military force to take down government who supported Remonstrants.  Members of Synod of Dort were “overwhelmingly opposed to Remonstrant theology.” They “were told that they could merely express their opinions and the Synod would pronounce judgment.”  

In the end, “Arminian leaders got civil authorities to decree that no contested doctrines might be preached, and in some instances succeeded in getting pulpits closed to specific reformed ministers.”  The influence of James Arminius continues to this day.




Bibliography 

Williams, Michael D. "The five points of Arminianism." Presbyterion 30, no. 1 (2004 2004): 11-36. ATLASerials, Religion Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed March 24, 2017).

McClintock, John, and James Strong. Cyclopedia of Biblical, theological, and ecclesiastical literature. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1981

 Allison, Gregg R. Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011.

Oden, Thomas C. Crisis Ministries. Classic Pastoral Care. New York: Crossroad, 1986.

Kurian, George Thomas. Nelson’s New Christian Dictionary: The Authoritative Resource on the Christian World. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001.

Needham, Nicholas R. 2000 Years of Christ's Power. newly revised ed. Fearn, Ross-shire, Scotland, U.K.: Christian Focus Publications Ltd, 2016.

Demarest, Bruce A. The Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of God. Foundations of Evangelical Theology. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2006.

Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd ed. Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, ©2001.

Gibson, David, and Jonathan Gibson, eds. From Heaven He Came and Sought Her: Definite Atonement in Historical, Biblical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspective. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2013

Herzog, Johann Jakob, and Philip Schaff. The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. publication place: Andesite Press, 2015.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scripture

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures ,  that he was buried , that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,   and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.  Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.   Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.   Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.   For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.   But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me.   Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.  (1 Corinthians 15:3)

The Last Moments of Christopher Hitchens life

Christopher Hitchens is one of the leading atheist of our times, they call it the new atheism now.  He also is the author of a book, “God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything,” that was just recently released; heavily opposing religion and any idea that God exist.  But right now Mr Hitchens is in his last stages of the esophageal cancer.  The New Your Time describes his last moments of life like this: “Some of these articles were written with the full consciousness that they might be my very last. Sobering in one way and exhilarating in another, this practice can obviously never become perfected.”  Another words, Hitchens has little time left. Smoking and drinking was something that Hitchens needed to quit, life was more important then the pleasures of these habits, not mentioning that he had a feeding tube installed since June.  He had power in articulating his worldview to others, the ideas, but were these thoughts the reality of our world? You could notice that Mr Hi

The Goodness of God and the Presence of Evil

Often skeptics of the Bible, pose a question: If God were all-powerful, he would have had ability to prevent evil. If God were all-good, he would have desired to prevent evil. So if God were both all-powerful and all good, there would have been no evil. But there is evil. Therefore, an all-powerful and all-good God does not exist. How can such a God exist, since there are so many children who are murdered every day? How can this God exist, when innocent girls get raped? The matter to be told, everyone has his own definition of evil. For example, some would say, murdering children after they are born is evil, yet murdering children while the baby is still in the womb is not. In fact, killing babies inside of a mother’s womb has been legalized and become socially accepted. Definition of Evil Most people who attempt to answer the problem of evil, define evil according to their own experiences. Overtime, a perspective on the definition of evil is formed, and most people reject